This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I remember on October 8th the feeling of going online and seeing people celebrating the rape and murder of Israelis. It was a complete shock, I was totally unprepared for the sheer glee in the online progressive spaces, the instantaneous "pray for Palestine" posts combined with "this is what decolonization looks like" posted approvingly under dead bodies.
Two years later I am able to be a good deal more amused than traumatized by the repulsive shenanigans of the bot army. Partly it's because I am now more aware that much of it is a bot army, a carefully coordinated effort not organic sentiment. Partly it's because compared to when our hostages were still in Gaza I can breathe more freely now.
Partly it's because it's funny. /r/worldnews had multiple users posting their analyses about how Iran has these massive stockpiles of 50,000 missiles and 5,000 launchers that they're keeping hidden in reserve, they're just gonna wait until the defense stockpiles disappear and then theyre totally gonna unleash the hell they haven't managed to until now. (It's easy to imagine them gnashing their teeth as they write this.)
Meanwhile metafilter, which is a site that after its leftist death spiral is so tiny and inactive I'm not sure it's worth deploying a bot army to, had an (Australian) user immediately saying Death to America and discourse ensuing between the people who thought that was totally fine and the people who thought that wasn't "helpful" which yielded the following gem
I know this kind of stuff would have infuriated me two years ago. It would have made me so angry and depressed. And now I can't help it, I laughed out loud reading that comment. Wow, it truly is possible to be this level of distilled stupid.
That doesn't mean I wish well on these people — I don't, I think they're disgusting. I've had a post brewing in me for two years about how I find it so much easier to sympathize with some terrorist in Gaza who is attached to home and his family and hates me, then with some keyboard warrior in the west with a moral compass directed straight up his ass. The terrorist may also be wishing death upon me (and attempting to enact it) but there's something more morally clean about him.
We've had a much quieter week than expected (thanks to all those thousands of launchers the iranians are stockpiling for the right moment). There's at least 1-3 sirens a day but often not more than that, where I live (other areas of the country have much more because they're more in the flight path of debris). The very beginning of the war had the most, up and down and up and down and up and down like I described, by it's tapered off pretty dramatically.
The houthis don't appear to have joined in with their Iranian friends at all this time around. Hezbollah did join in, which has pissed off the non Hezbollah Lebanese enough we might, maybe, perhaps, if I'm being crazily optimistic, actually see some significant meaningful backlash against them there.
I've been working from home. We are hosting my siblings-in-law who don't have access to a bomb shelter near them and have a newborn, which comes with the expected tensions but has been ok overall.
My poor team lead is Muslim so he gets to have the rocket induced sleep deprivation and also fasting for Ramadan. At the beginning of the week he told me between those two things his brain was barely functioning, but as the rocket fire has decreased we've had more peaceful nights and he's been doing better, as have we all.
It's still uncomfortable and hard, my kids still struggle with waking up to sirens, I know people who lost their homes, I've read about the people who died although I don't know any personally. But I go online and read about all the dead my government has been allegedly covering up and it comforts me, I like not living in the alternate reality these people are living in.
Unlike many many people online who seem to know a tremendous amount about all sorts of things (so many bombs have hit us and been covered up so effectively that no one who actually lives here knows about them — but these people magically do) I know almost nothing. Just the daily experience here, and hoping things turn out okay.
Hope everyone here is ok as well.
Are we supposed to feel sorry for the people who more than anyone else brought this on themselves - or am I misunderstanding your post? Because polls consistently show that Israelis are the only ones who support this war, and also that they dont give a shit about Iranian civilians. The former makes sense, because this war is for Israels benefit only. For 2 years now we have seen videos of Israelis gleefully committing warcrimes, and then, posting them online. We have seen people take their kids to block food from entering into Gaza and arrange conferences about buying and settling in Gaza land. We have seen soldiers mass rape a prisoner, and then seen those same soldiers be paraded around as heroes. The foremost jewish zionist congressman in America wants to nuke Gaza.
There is no group in modern America who has had an easier ride when it comes to PR than Israel. We are talking iron-clad bipartisan support to the point where both parties forced through the sale of TikTok. Nearly every major media was stacked full of zionist who would bend stories to present Israel in the best possible light, and that was before Ellison started buying everything up. And after all this we are still supposed to feel sorry for you? Have anyone in the Israeli side considered asking their countrymen to not behave as out of control violent barbarians in order to get more compassion?
Israel intelligence agencies literally used a sitting US senator as an asset to manipulate the president.
https://x.com/katiadoyl/status/2030126333636809191
This is in the wall street journal, they don't even try to hide it. And why would they? They make it clear they're the king, Israel speaks and the west listens. Many of our politicians are actively training with foreign spies to control American politics and they're flaunting it.
Every once in a while they go oops and say the quiet part out a little too loud (like Rubio and Johnson admitting that Israel pushed us into the war before now trying to claim the opposite) but it's barely disguised. And if this is what they're public about, just imagine all the things happening in the shadows.
What exactly is your objection? That Israel attempts to influence the US government? That it lobbies friendly members of the American legislature to lobby the US president? That it spies on people? That it uses that information to improve its influence efforts?
I really would like to know exactly what you believe Israel is doing wrong here and why.
Certainly one could make the case that countries shouldn't try to lobby or influence the governments of other countries. Do you share that view?
Do you believe it's normal for sitting politicians to collude with foreign spy agencies, including access to classified information that their own domestic intelligence won't share (or maybe can't share, we're just assuming that Israeli intelligence isn't giving any fake information to Lindsey Graham to manipulate him towards Israeli interests after all) in order to manipulate the feds?
I'm not sure I would call that normal lobbying.
Not in the US. Here is the definition of "collude"
Now kindly answer my questions:
What exactly is your objection? That Israel attempts to influence the US government? That it lobbies friendly members of the American legislature to lobby the US president? That it spies on people? That it uses that information to improve its influence efforts?
Certainly one could make the case that countries shouldn't try to lobby or influence the governments of other countries. Do you share that view?
Are you claiming that Israel has done something unlawful? If so, exactly what law was broken? (I won't ask if you believe Israel did something secret, since you said "they don't even try to hide it"
I'm trying to understand your position here, because I strongly suspect that you don't actually have a principled objection to Israel's conduct.
Not him
Yes, especially in ways that are obviously detrimental to the citizens of the United States, and beneficial to the citizens of Israel.
Yes. Do it yourself. Send your own lobbiests to argue on their own merits. Members of the American legislature should be doing things that benefit the citizens of America, not the citizens of Israel.
Yes. Don't spy on us.
Yes. Again, American politicians should be acting for the American people. Not getting (((influenced))) to help the Israeli people.
Yes. Leave other counties alone. Self determination is a virtue.
No laws have been broken, but that doesn't mean it's okay. Given you post here, there are good odds you lean right, thus, there are good odds you find many practices of your society amoral, which are not illegal.
Do you find drag queen-story hour at the library upsetting? Or 12 year olds being put on puberty blockers against the wishes of one of their parents? Those things aren't specifically illegal, so by this logic you can't have a problem with it lol.
Ok, so here's the question. It was reported that Saudia Arabia's senior royalty repeatedly lobbied Donald Trump to attack Iran. How many posts have you made complaining about this?
So I take you object to Jewish Americans and Christian Zionists lobbying the US government to take pro-Israel action?
Perhaps not, but the accusation on the table was that Israel engaged in lobbying which was either secret or illegal. It seems that accusation was false.
Please show me where I stated or implied that if it's not illegal, then it's okay. Please QUOTE me.
TIA.
One now! I dislike this. Fuck off, do your own dirty work if you want it done.
Yes. Do your own dirty work if you want it done. As they used to say on 4chan, "not your personal army".
I am also opposed to a hypothetical extremely powerful and influential Thai-americans lobbying America to get involved in their border disputes with Cambodia. The American military isn't a tool for various other governments to settle scores, it's to keep the American people safe. My safety has not been improved here.
That wasn't me so take it up with him. I think my views are quite internally consistent.
I wasn't claiming any laws were broken, so take it up with the other guy. I was just responding to your question.
You ended your comment I originally responded to with " I strongly suspect that you don't actually have a principled objection to Israel's conduct."
I have now demonstrated my principled objection to Israeli conduct.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
How do you think countries normally interact? A US Senator goes on a diplomatic trip and meets with members of the foreign government, who discuss how to talk to the US executive - and this is shocking to you? A foreign intelligence agency shares military intelligence with an allied government to convince them to act, and this is somehow beyond the pale? How dare Israel advocate for a course of action! Absolute monsters!
Sorry, but I find this to be a really thoughtless take. Like, you haven't put an ounce of critical thought into this WSJ article. I feel like you're motivated here either by your armchair objection to the military action itself, and are working backwards to justify why it was a bad idea, or by simple dislike of Israel - or perhaps both!
Is it normal to meet with foreign intelligence agencies and work with them in that?
They didn't share it with the government in general, it is specifically Lindsey Graham being shown information that the US intelligence won't share with him. Or perhaps can't share with him, we're just assuming that Israeli intelligence isn't giving any fake information to Lindsey Graham to manipulate him towards Israeli interests after all. They're not loyal to the US, they're loyal to Israel and the idea that the spies are going to be honest to random gullible senators is a pretty bold one. Even "ally" spy agencies are still constantly at odds and trying to manipulate each other.
Yes. That was my point. The only reason you think it's not normal is because you read a tweet to that effect.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Yeah, I'm getting a similar sense. Other countries lobby the United States all the time in various ways. In fact, it was widely reported that the de facto monarch of Saudi Arabia repeatedly called Trump to push for this Iran attack.
If people have a general objection to foreign countries lobbying the US for military intervention, fine, but it seems like that's not the real objection here.
Me, I do
See my response to your other post.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I think the objection here is to the implications of the phrase "coaching him on how to lobby the president for action", insofar as lobbying implies at best trying to browbeat your target into action by being louder and more persistent than the other lobbyists, and at worst, disingenuous persuasion techniques bordering on deceit. In the strongest sense of the word, "lobbying" the POTUS is not only different from seeking "convince" him, but, arguably, the exact opposite.
Of course, this is making a lot out of a word choice that's not actually a direct quote as far as I can tell.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
It is truly insane. And it still not enough to satisfy the Israelis. After the campaign against Ms Rachel, a bunch of zionist lawyers in UK are now suing Piers Morgan. As long as every single antizionist voice in the worlds is not silences they cant rest it seems.
Certainly one could similarly argue that as long as Israel exists, there is a subset of the population that will not rest, but instead work to undermine, defame, and ultimately destroy Israel if they can. So for example, those of us who are pro-Israel see a guy like David Duke, a white supremacist who couldn't care less about non-whites, suddenly seeming to care a great deal about Palestinian Arabs. Or we see a group called "queers for Palestine" which seems pretty much okay with the fact that in Hamas-ruled Gaza, homosexual activity was a serious offense.
Moreover, the demands made by these people, generally speaking, point to the destruction of Israel. For example, the Israel-haters want a "State of Palestine," but that State of Palestine would not absorb Palestinian Arab "refugees" from places like Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan. (Even though Israel has absorbed all bona fide Jewish refugees from anywhere in the world.) Rather, they want Israel to absorb and offer citizenship to all of these persons, even though it would turn Israel into a majority-Arab state, inevitably resulting in a civil war, mass death and destruction, with a real chance of the Jews being slaughtered or chased out.
One thing that gives the game away was the moment, a few years back, when Israel reached a peace agreement with the UAE. Were progressive "peace activists" overjoyed? Of course not, because it was a step forward for Israel.
The upshot of all this is that anyone who is pro-Israel can see what's going going. There is a war being fought to destroy Israel. Not just on the traditional battlefield, but in courtrooms; in the court of public opinion; within school boards; and so on.
Under such circumstances, it's hardly unreasonable to fight back. Of course, any countermeasures, no matter how legitimate, will be spun as unjustified aggression by Zionists and used to further justify the war to destroy Israel. But at the end of the day, it's better to be feared than to be loved.
So long as you can avoid being hated, if I recall my Machiavelli. Of course, if you expect to be hated regardless, your options do then devolve to "be not feared, dead, and hopefully eulogised pleasantly and to no longer have your corpse be hated" or "be hated, feared, and have a chance at continuing to live", well, the calculus seems clear.
I was curious, so I looked it up:
()()(*)
Agreed.
Which translation of The Prince is this? I want to know so I can [fedpost] the translator.
I am pretty sure that the translator is Tim Parks. More out of curiosity than anything else, what is your objection to the translation?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link